Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Nuclear1 on November 17, 2009, 05:46:37 pm
-
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01523/obama_1523079c.jpg)
I mean, having a US president bow to a foreign leader, isn't that the next logical step anyway?
Bah, the White House can make any statement it wants saying that President Kenya was just being respectful, but we know the truth! Thanks, Fox! Obama, you can return to the traditional, Amurrican way of dealing with foreign leaders: pissing them off! We don't bow to them Japs, they done bombed Pearl.
**This post also comes in a sarcasm-free variety. Now available at all grocery stores!
-
I wonder if Obama is good at Limbo.
-
*_*
-
Here's why us "merkins"(sounds like a pickle IMO) get our panties in a wad over his self-effacing is because we don't bow to anyone.
-
*Facepalm.
I'm rather convinced that this thread is fail. The sooner it's locked, the better.
-
Not quite yet, I'll wait until something happens that makes it lock-worthy.
That said, it should be noted that the common depiction of bowing as a sign of submission is at fault here, in Japan, it is a sign of respect, and the depth of the bow is very important. In truth, he should have kept eye-contact during the bow, since they are of comparable status, but still the thought is there, and I'm certain that the Japanese appreciated the effort.
-
Not quite yet, I'll wait until something happens that makes it lock-worthy.
That said, it should be noted that the common depiction of bowing as a sign of submission is at fault here, in Japan, it is a sign of respect, and the depth of the bow is very important. In truth, he should have kept eye-contact during the bow, since they are of comparable status, but still the thought is there, and I'm certain that the Japanese appreciated the effort.
^ This.
-
Not quite yet, I'll wait until something happens that makes it lock-worthy.
That said, it should be noted that the common depiction of bowing as a sign of submission is at fault here, in Japan, it is a sign of respect, and the depth of the bow is very important. In truth, he should have kept eye-contact during the bow, since they are of comparable status, but still the thought is there, and I'm certain that the Japanese appreciated the effort.
QFT, though I think he bowed a little too deeply, myself.
-
His back could've been straighter, but in essence people be getting their pants in a bunch over him showing just a little too much respect, which never hurt anyone.
-
QFT, though I think he bowed a little too deeply, myself.
I am quite aware that bowing is a sign of respect in Japanese as well as other Asian and Arabic cultures. My only thought was that there is a difference between a respectful slight inclination and a from the waist full bow.
-
Regarding the controversy over Obama's nationality:
(http://imagebin.org/index.php?mode=image&id=72071)
-
Here's why us "merkins"(sounds like a pickle IMO) get our panties in a wad over his self-effacing is because we don't bow to anyone.
But you weren't worried about Bush kissing Saudi oil magnates?
I thought 'merkins didn't do homo with anybody.
-
@Redsniper: Really? No need for crap like that.
@GB: he probably was. Probably also worried about Obama doing nearly the same thing.
And 'merkins' sound like some kind of pickle.
-
That's because it sounds like Gherkins ;)
-
QFT, though I think he bowed a little too deeply, myself.
I am quite aware that bowing is a sign of respect in Japanese as well as other Asian and Arabic cultures. My only thought was that there is a difference between a respectful slight inclination and a from the waist full bow.
You do realize my post was sarcasm, right?
Obama's not doing any harm by bowing in respect.
-
It is about time America shows a more humble side like Obama is doing in that photo. People should stop dwelling on wars that took place long ago. I grow tired of the Roman like arrogance here. Certain other countries have let old wars go that ended decades ago and they stopped dwelling on it with no hard feelings anymore. Maybe this country should learn from that. Time to move on and let it go like Japan and VN have already.
Funny because Japanese arrogance (and rascism) is far above and beyond what it is in the US. People will stop dwelling on ww2 in East Asia when Japan takes responsibility for what it did, period.
-
If we all sit around waiting for everyone else to apologise for 'what they did' several decades or centuries ago, then, quite frankly, we are screwed.
And yes, racial stereotypes in Japan are still a problem, but I'd say that isn't so much an inbred mistrust of foreigners anymore, and more a case of those stereotypes making their way into culture and the Japanese not quite understanding,
-
Nuclear's average post quality has went down the pooper over the past few months.
-
ok, this one is totally overblown, not gonna even try to defend it.
-
What's with the misquoting? :wtf:
-
You guys know he's being sarcastic, right?
-
*_*
-
If we all sit around waiting for everyone else to apologise for 'what they did' several decades or centuries ago, then, quite frankly, we are screwed.
A lot of people crap on Japan's leaders for visiting the Yasukuni shrine for Japan's war dead, and frankly I think those people are full of crap themselves. To refuse to honor those who died for your country is a very slippery slope. However this is a real and very serious issue in that Japan actively denies responsiblity for documented atrocities, refuses to grant reperations to survivors of them, and in general behaves like they've forgetton the whole Second World War. After the war the US occupation force ended up having to protect Japan's veterans. While some kind of outrage at the military was probably unavoidable considering how utterly ineptly stupid their handling of the war was at the high command level, it wasn't directed at those people exclusively or even in spillover, but the rank and file. Because Japan wanted to erase the past.
In WWII, USA killed many Japanese and their civilians too. So maybe Japan doesn't need to apologize since they lost much more and suffered too much in the past, more than USA, including innocents civvies. Pearl Harbor seemed like an attack towards USA military only and little to no callatoral damage. Also, Japan has helped USA with certain technology and imports for a while now and actions speak louder than words. Time to move on.
We aren't the ones who want, or need, an apology. Japan's behavior in China, Malaya, Borneo, the Phillipines, however, needs it. Japan, in China alone, commited atrocities to match or exceed the Holocaust or Stalin's purges. Does Germany not need to clearly remember and to apologize for killing the Jews?
Also your historical scholarship and indeed scholarship in general is bullcrap. I will engage with it at some other time, as I lack the patience at the moment.
-
Nuclear's average post quality has went down the pooper over the past few months.
Because he doesn't agree with you? That seems a bit harsh. :wtf:
-
Thing is, I suppose it's because I live in Europe, where we've been taking turns at commiting atrocities on each other for centuries. If we waited for England, France, Germany, Spain, Italy and Holland to apologise for all the terrible things they've done to each other, Europe, even in its current state would never exist.
It's one thing wanting an apology, it's another thing treating a country as though they 'owe' something until they apologise, it's usually better to build strong ties to the country in question, and then start talking about the problems of the past.
-
*_*
-
If we all sit around waiting for everyone else to apologise for 'what they did' several decades or centuries ago, then, quite frankly, we are screwed.
It isn't that easy when there are many people who are still alive that lived through such terrible atrocities. What if there was a country that invaded your country, committed all kinds of horrible atrocities to your grand parents, and after a third party came in and crushed them, they sit on the other sit of the border smugly looking down on you while simultaneously refusing to take any sort of responsibility for it?
-
I don't really care to dwell on these little primitive war battles
Then don't post ridiculously long posts which practically shout your ignorance on the matter.
If you know nothing about the subject and don't wish to know then don't speak about it at all.
-
That doesn't make them all in on it or all responsible for the war.
It makes them an accomplice because they supported the government.
I don't care that the civilians and kids in Japanese schools back then were taught basics on how to defend themselves against US forces. That doesn't make them all in on it or all responsible for the war
A.) It was Japan that started the war with the US
B.) They supported the government
I'll respect you more though if you don't call me stupid directly or indirectly and don't be arrogant.
I suggest you take your own advice.
-
That doesn't make them all in on it or all responsible for the war.
It makes them an accomplice because they supported the government.
I don't care that the civilians and kids in Japanese schools back then were taught basics on how to defend themselves against US forces. That doesn't make them all in on it or all responsible for the war
A.) It was Japan that started the war with the US
B.) They supported the government
Sounds like you don't disagree with what you quoted there, however.
-
It was disagreeing. He was saying civilians are not responsible at least in part for their country bombing other countries even though they supported that government. I said he's wrong.
-
Wasn't Japan ruled by a non-diplomatic system back then?
-
It was disagreeing. He was saying civilians are not responsible at least in part for their country bombing other countries even though they supported that government. I said he's wrong.
You lie. He was saying that "that doesn't make them [civilians and kids] all in on it or all responsible for the war" which is a completely different statement, and one which you don't disagree with.
-
Wasn't Japan ruled by a non-diplomatic system back then?
Which was supported by the people, and was quite popular. They very much believed in what they were doing right up to the very end.
You lie. He was saying that "that doesn't make them [civilians and kids] all in on it or all responsible for the war" which is a completely different statement, and one which you don't disagree with.
I don't appreciate being called a liar, and that is not how I interpreted his statement.
-
I think you'll find in the main part, people supported the Government because it was stability, and because they were in for a world of pain if they spoke out about it, the Japanese people believed what they were told, like most countries citizens, and you can rest assured they were not told 'We are going to go out and torture, rape and kill our way across the Pacific".
Sorry Kosh, but I disagree with you here, saying that a country ruled by a Dictatorial style Emperor should be held responsible in its entirety for commited atrocities is like saying that every citizen in Iraq is guilty of gassing Kurds. Resistance in Japan was subtle, and the country had hundreds of years of inground obedience to the Government, they didn't choose their Emperor and they had no tools to resist the Emperor and were, like every populace, fed on propoganda and lies to make them believe they were in the right.
Edit: It needs to be remembered that Japan had a long history of feudal inter-clan wars that were particulary barbaric in nature, almost as barbaric as the wars that united China, doesn't make it 'right', but it doesn't make the entire populace complicit in what amounted to arguments between nobility in which they were nothing more than the tools of war.
-
Eh.
/thread, really.
-
You lie. He was saying that "that doesn't make them [civilians and kids] all in on it or all responsible for the war" which is a completely different statement, and one which you don't disagree with.
I don't appreciate being called a liar, and that is not how I interpreted his statement.
There's nothing to interpret. That's what he said, and then you claimed he had said something completely different. Twisting "that the civilians and kids in Japanese schools back then were taught basics on how to defend themselves against US forces doesn't make them all in on it or all responsible for the war" into "civilians are not responsible at least in part for their country bombing other countries even though they supported that government" isn't an interpretation, it's just twisting it into something completely different.
-
That's what he said,
In context with "only the senior japanese military should apologize because they were the only ones responsible" it made it very clear what his real meaning was, unless he was contradicting himself.
-
That's what he said,
In context with "only the senior japanese military should apologize because they were the only ones responsible" it made it very clear what his real meaning was, unless he was contradicting himself.
Quote for the bolded part? At least I can't see one. Also, what is the "real meaning" here then? "No civilians were responsible for the war", or something else?
-
*_*
-
You folks are travelling a bit far from the point. The original issue was that Japan seems to not acknowledge thier part in the Second World War. Specifically their actions in China, Korea, etc. Debating who shares the national quilt in Japan is a bit futile at this point, most of the decision makers at the time are probably dead by now. Suffice to say Imperial Japan committed numerous large scale atrocities upon the other Asian populations they conquered, in much the same way as the Reich met out genocide on the Slavs. While I'm not a big fan of the father's sins are transfered to the children concept, for example my ancestors emigrated to the States after the Civil War therefore I have no personal guilt over slavery, I know what occurred in the pre-Civil War America. Knowledge of history makes us better prepared to not repeat past mistakes. Refusing to acknowledge it paves the way for it occurring again.
Take for example American Indians. American school systems pretty much glaze over the true implications of "Manifest Destiny." If the actual history of the European Settler/American Indian relations was common knowledge the US Government's current exploitive policies towards the tribes probably would be deemed unacceptable to the public. Since it is not, the Fed gets to shaft the Reservations for their natural resources and few people know it. History is important, ignoring it is dangerous especially at a national level.
-
Agreed, the matter should not be forgotten, but it also should not be allowed to hold either side back from forming closer ties, an apology from a friend is far easier to obtain than an apology from someone who doesn't trust you.
-
Debating who shares the national quilt in Japan
You mean this?
(http://ny-image3.etsy.com//il_fullxfull.82926487.jpg)
:D
(Sorry, couldn't resist).
-
Debating who shares the national quilt in Japan
You mean this?
(http://ny-image3.etsy.com//il_fullxfull.82926487.jpg)
:D
(Sorry, couldn't resist).
The entire Sengoku period was brought about due to confrontation over ownership of the "The Quilt" I thought that was common knowledge.
-
They did a version later with numbers, the Sodoku period....
-
ok, this one is totally overblown, not gonna even try to defend it.
agreed. Its just simple common diplomatic courtesy.
-
Wow, nice thread explosion.
1) I would like to congratulate everyone who's posted in this thread. To take Obama bowing and getting the point to where it is is nothing short of incredible.
2)
Red text == BloodEagle; //Obvious
My response to a previous post higher up on the page:
Well racism is everywhere and there is more here than many might think. Japan is racist as well. What place isn't? As long as there are physical and personal differences, there will always be discrimination. Anyone thinking it can be changed completely is not living in reality.
Agreed.
I think USA has a habit of thinking all other countries are inferior, and that upsets me because no country is the best in every way and there are different areas of being the best. Maybe that is one reason many countries don't like USA. Because they feel that USA thinks of them as inferior. Also because USA likes to fight wars and often joins wars apparently because it likes to fight any country or group that doesn't agree with pure democracy and capitalism. Like they like to go over there and kill people who are communists and force its capitalistic and cultural views on others, which is wrong. It would explain one reason why USA goes overboard in killing the other side in wars, but I guess many countries also try to force their culture on others. It happened many times in the past and the French did it too.
Wait. What? Where did this come from?
Following WWII (and in some cases before it), popular opinion usually and greatly dissented from the government's and military's actions regarding wars and "police actions". It isn't fair to paint every citizen as a blood-thirsty lunatic, and it comes off as being very insulting.
In WWII, USA killed many Japanese and their civilians too. So maybe Japan doesn't need to apologize since they lost much more and suffered too much in the past, more than USA, including innocents civvies. Pearl Harbor seemed like an attack towards USA military only and little to no callatoral damage. Also, Japan has helped USA with certain technology and imports for a while now and actions speak louder than words. Time to move on.
What. The. Hell. Seriously. I mean, damn. There's so much wrong with that frame of mind, that I can't even begin to put it into clear words.
And, honestly, if you can't see the problem with that, you never will. No matter what I or anyone else writes about it.
I heard Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because Japan was afraid of no longer being able to get oil from USA. Tell me if I'm wrong though. --You're wrong, mostly.-- Maybe Japan felt it had to attack to get oil and survive, because if it didn't, maybe they would run out of oil. --Wanna guess why they were running out of oil? I'll give you a hint, it involved China.-- Also, maybe Japan assumed that the reason the US fleet was garrisoned near Hawaii was because they were planning to attack Japan and Japan attacked first before USA had a chance to start an attack. --The fleet was garrisoned at Pearl Harbor because, within two weeks (I believe), they were expecting Japan to assualt Wake Island (which was within flight distance of Hawaii) with the fleet that they'd been building up.-- You have to put yourselves in that situation to understand. If USA was in that situation, would they not do the same out of fear of running out of resources or being attacked first? --Stealing is wrong. Preemptively (before a formal declaration is made) attacking a nation because you think that they might attack you sometime in the future is very wrong.-- It was probably why they were invading other countries, though it wasn't right. --Which has absolutely nothing to do with the war crimes commited.--
Maybe it was possible that Japan had a good reason to attack, and the US goverment wanted America to think that it was an unprovoked attack when the real reasons for Japan attacking were classified by the US government. Who knows? If the US did anything wrong and started a war from a misunderstanding, then of course they would not admit it to the public and they would say that the other side started it. Did Japan start it or was that falsified for US propaganda and misleading the public? Just like the theory on 911 being staged by the Bush admin in order to make it look like terrorists attacked (red flag op) so the admin could gain public support and make it look like the reason USA invaded Iraq was to protect USA, but it might have been all about oil and 911 could have been a very convincing and ingenious cover up.
No. Seriously, don't go there.
Often in war when countries fight each other, I see it as neither side being the good guys or bad guys; just sides that disagree with each other and fight each other as a result, or because they feel they have to in order to survive and to get resources, and also from misunderstandings of cultural differences. Of course Nazi Germany is an exception and they are bad. But many assume Germans in general are nazis--[CITATION FREAKING NEEDED]-- when that is not true, just like many people think all muslims and Arabs are terrorists when that is silly. I could make fun of USA's fear of terrorists and joke by saying that people here think "oh no, a terrorist. I'm so scared, etc ect".
3)
They did a version later with numbers, the Sodoku period....
:wakka:
-
And 'merkins' sound like some kind of pickle.
Not exactly. Quoth the wiki, A merkin (first use 1617)[1] is a pubic wig, originally worn by prostitutes after shaving their genitalia.
-
I don't agree in full with him, but I think WeatherOp had a good point back on the first page of this. Nuclear1, I'm not entirely sure why you made this thread in the first place; you had to know that it'd wind up as a cluster**** of some sort within a page or two. You decry the viewpoint you were skewering in your original post as being laughably idiotic, and rightly so, so why even do it the dignity of acknowledging it? The primary reason people spew crap like this is because they want recognition, either positive or negative, for their own fulfillment. So how do you combat that? Don't respond to it, don't notice it, don't even give it the time of day. Just let it languish away, completely ignored.
-
And 'merkins' sound like some kind of pickle.
Not exactly. Quoth the wiki, A merkin (first use 1617)[1] is a pubic wig, originally worn by prostitutes after shaving their genitalia.
:blah:
:ick:
Opinion on the matter at hand: It was 50 years ago. Get the hell over it. EVERYONE. Just make the damn apology or (alternately) shut up about getting one.
-
Only 50 years => Survivors are still alive.
-
Only 50 years => Survivors are still alive.
Doesn't really change my point.
-
That's an odd position. Survivors of atrocities like the ones committed by Germany and Japan (and to a somewhat lesser extent, the US) should just "get the hell over it"?
-
Yes. The people who committed said atrocities were caught, tried, and most likely executed, or else they won. Guess which actually happened in this case.
-
Depends who you're talking about. Japanese-Americans lost everything and were then given next to nothing for example.
-
The people who committed genocide against the Native Americans were never brought to justice.
-
.
-
Looks like Civ Leader George Washington needs to push the turn button a few more times so that the -1 modifier to Civ Leader Tokugawa's relations, "You nuked us!!!", can go away.
-
I don't agree in full with him, but I think WeatherOp had a good point back on the first page of this. Nuclear1, I'm not entirely sure why you made this thread in the first place; you had to know that it'd wind up as a cluster**** of some sort within a page or two. You decry the viewpoint you were skewering in your original post as being laughably idiotic, and rightly so, so why even do it the dignity of acknowledging it? The primary reason people spew crap like this is because they want recognition, either positive or negative, for their own fulfillment. So how do you combat that? Don't respond to it, don't notice it, don't even give it the time of day. Just let it languish away, completely ignored.
This is my drunken opinion, but dosn't every thread here? If only because we all resort to personal attacks?
-
... So this went from a sacarstic interpretation of Obama bowing in greeting, to a totally fire up argument about America's foreign relations?
-
Kazan lives!
-
Opinion on the matter at hand: It was 50 years ago. Get the hell over it. EVERYONE. Just make the damn apology or (alternately) shut up about getting one.
I'll let it go when every attempt to gain reparations stops being shot down by Japanese courts. I mean, sure, we admit indirectly that we kidnapped all the "comfort girls" and repeatedly raped them, but we refuse reparations because it was soooo long ago! Well they're still here to sue you, dip****s, and nobody made any trials over that subject.
Even an attempt by POWs to gain reparations for their work for Japan (which cost many lives and was under conditions to make one puke) on the grounds they hadn't been paid for it failed.
They're just assholes. They deserve to be treated like assholes.
-
Kazan lives!
:wtf:
-
Kazan lives!
:wtf:
What, you weren't around when Kazan was still posting here?
-
Japan was a much bigger asshole in WW2 than we were, I'm willing to let what they did to POWs and all of the lands they conquered go because it was three generations ago and they have sense shown themselves to be better than that, but if you want to dig that **** up I'm willing to pick it up also.
-
Some of you guys should look up Nanjing Massacre...
-
Most of us have, I would wager.'
The past is meant to be learned from, not dwelt on.
-
The past is meant to be learned from, not dwelt on.
Wait. What?
-
.
-
What, you weren't around when Kazan was still posting here?
I was, but I'm pretty sure he didn't post in here, nor do I remember his exact way of posting so ...
-
Most of us have, I would wager.'
The past is meant to be learned from, not dwelt on.
Good point. It's just so much harder for Chinese to forget when many Japanese don't know much about it.
Anyways, I was just trying both sides of the story in.
This topic has gone a little off-course, but I guess that's what they're there for. :P
-
Nixon bowed to Hirohito
Hirohito was emperor of Japan when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor
'nuff said